[Python-Dev] Python 3 design principles
kay.schluehr at gmx.net
Thu Sep 1 08:55:48 CEST 2005
Oren Tirosh wrote:
> Python 3 will most probably make big changes in the internal
> implementation and the C API. Perhaps it will even be generated from
Don't you think the current Python 3 "visions" becomes rather pointless
with the raise of PyPy and interpreter extensions that are developed
polymorphically? If the distinction between a user defined package and
a language extension becomes more or less irrelevant who needs a
language design committee for it's control? If someone takes the Python
core in order to implement static typing it might be happen and run in a
separate object space. But than, I'm almost sure, it won't be an
ill-defined concept like "optional static typing" but Hindley-Milnor (
or a generalization ) which restricts dynamicity but enables type safety
and static control otherwise.
The idea of forking a language with a new release and thereby
deevaluating older code seems somewhat archaic to me. Or the other way
round: archaic materials and media like papyrus and scripture enabled
communication across centurys changing slightly evolutionary and
continously. Form this point of view PL development is still in a state
of modernistic, youthfull irresponsibility.
> I don't think keeping the common subset will really stand in the way
> of making big improvements. The proposed 3.x changes that break it
> seem more like nitpicking to me than significant improvements.
So it seems.
More information about the Python-Dev